Lots of blogs have been posting the video below of a young Japanese girl going absolutely insane when she meets Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliff on the set of the last film.
What I thought was most fascinating about the video was a tiny detail: at around the 4:00 mark, the girl gives Daniel a present that turns out to be a rubber stamp embossed with the Japanese character for her name.
Considering the Japanese love for all things techie, it was surprising to me to see that this decidedly old-world object would be the special gift to an apparent idol.
I also think it is one of many signs that points to a wonderful duality in many of today’s youth – a desire for the ephemeral joys of text messaging and for the more permanent marks that they can leave on the world and on each other.
One of the coolest concepts of many a sci-fi novel and movie, is a device that can basically spit out any object, fully formed, based just on some basic data.
The days of having just such a device get ever closer to home, as Engadget points out with its look at the Cupcake CNC:
The thing extrudes Lego-type plastic into fairly detailed shapes, and MakerBot sells it as a kit for $750, or fully assembled for $2,500. What’s most exciting is that the MakerBot folks are now working on a 3D scanner kit, which once combined with the CupCake CNC will make a full-on homegrown replicator.
Imagine how disruptive, in a game-changing way, this could be for so many of the industries and business models we now take for granted. We’ve see what happened to the music labels when their products, hard-good records, tapes and CDs, became obsolete. What happens when we no longer have to go to the store, for, say, a new set of dishes. Instead, we could power up the 3D Printer, find a great image of our perfect plate online, press a few buttons and within a few minutes a whole new set of dishes could be yours.
Now, imagine what happens when people realize they no longer need to buy the expensive designer dishes from the over-priced boutique but can just take a few pictures and go print out the plates at home.
While these sorts of innovations are a boon to the consumer, something like the Cupcake CNC should terrify and lot of older businesses and should inspire younger entrepreneurs to start building new models that will maximize the opportunities presented by this new technology.
Oh, check out this sweet video of Cupcake CNC in action:
I shudder to think what some big ad agency charged Gillette for the videos on their YouTube channel.
Purportedly aimed at teaching men how to shave various body parts, the animated how-to’s are really just a platform for the Gillette products which would be fine if, instead of getting legitimately useful information we were given a touch of authentic humor.
Sadly, neither is on offer. The advice is minimal and redundant and the attempts at humor result in more cringing than grinning. Adding insult to injury, only the link-bait‘y “How to Shave Your Groin” has attracted over 10,000 views, with the other videos languishing under 2,000.
Since the videos are neither entertaining or helpful, it is unlikely they will ever find much of a viewership. Gillette surely isn’t going to be satisfied by these sorts of numbers but I’m sure their ad agency will convince them it had nothing to do with the crappy value of the content itself.
UPDATE: Well, thanks in large part to lots of blog mockery, the Gillette YouTube spots have “exploded” with Groin shooting up to over 140,000 views. Still, the other videos are failing to reach 10,000. A combined total of less that 250,000 still can’t impress Gillette.
Time Warner is announcing plans of its own to offer broadband streaming access to their channel offerings, for a price. Right now it sounds like they will include access in existing bundles and may have an option for broadband only access in the future. (more here)
This raises a few questions:
1) If the majority of the content is streaming only, does that mean all programming will be available on-demand at any time or only when it is “aired” on TV? There isn’t a lot of value-added if all one gets is to watch what would be on TV, but on your computer.
2) Considering almost everything on TV is already available online what will Time Warner offer that I can’t already get, often for free?
3) What’s really in it for the broadcasters? Why should NBC let Time Warner distribute their content online when they seem to be having plenty of luck doing it themselves via Hulu?
4) It seems highly unlikely the Time Warner offering will include the ability to download content meaning that there will still be plenty of reasons to pirate.
To say that I am skeptical of these plans is not over-stating things. The whole notion of a centralized distributor like TWC that actually doesn’t provide a legitmate service feels dated and increasingly obsolete.
Kevin Kelly has a great post on the notion of moving from an ownership-based world to an access-based world. Here’s a taste:
Very likely, in the near future, I won’t “own” any music, or books, or movies. Instead I will have immediate access to all music, all books, all movies using an always-on service, via a subscription fee or tax. I won’t buy – as in make a decision to own — any individual music or books because I can simply request to see or hear them on demand from the stream of ALL. I may pay for them in bulk but I won’t own them. The request to enjoy a work is thus separated from the more complicated choice of whether I want to “own” it. I can consume a movie, music or book without having to decide or follow up on ownership.
In many ways, a lot of us are already there. The truth is I haven’t bought an media in a physical format in ages. Not a CD or DVD to speak of and even my dead-tree book purchases have plummeted.
Just what has replaced all of these hard-good purchases? My NetFlix subscription, Pandora, Boxee, Stanza, ITunes and all the rest. When it gets right down to it about the only things I really buy-to-own these days are food and alcohol and I don’t really “own” those for long.
Of course, the idea of a subscription-based life works for goods that have little-to-no scarcity factor it seems less likely that rental will replace all aspects of ownership.
Michael Buckley - Image by feastoffools via Flickr
The NYT has a splashy piece about people making “real” money posting videos on YouTube.
Actually, it’s about one guy making real money, sort of through YouTube and a lot of other outlets.
“What the Buck” is the YouTube show profiled and it is the one most often trotted out to show how great the YouTube partnership program can be for independent video creators.
The only problem with the article is that makes it seem like what Michael Buckley has done is something that is/could become common on YouTube but that’s just not the case. The vast majority of semi-pro video makers simply don’t put the sort of time, energy and commitment into their work and thus, do not get much in the way of rev-share from YouTube.
It takes a staggering combination of artistic vision and hard work to make a go of it online, to break through all the noise and to actually produce a consistent product that keeps viewers coming back.
While there is nothing especially wrong with the NYT piece, I think it falls short of communicating how impressive it is for Buckley to have done so well.
Remember when blank CDs cost a few bucks a pop? Now, of course, their almost free. Combine that with the fact that more people are downloading music than ever before and it isn’t surprising to see CDs simply being given away by bands for promotional purposes.
Of course, there is still the issue of distribution. Distribution of hard goods is expensive. No way around that. Unless, of course, you piggyback on an existing platform.
That’s just what rising UK band McFly has done, partnering with a big paper in the UK to put a free copy of their album in every issue of the paper. Not only can the paper offer a free gift, but the band reaches thousands of potential new fans.
“As we’ve noted in the past, this is a fantastic strategy for both newspapers and musicians. It helps both sides quite a bit, which is exactly what the band sees, noting that they just want to get more fans, and are hoping more will come see them on their latest tour.”
I really feel for Chris Albrecht over on NewTeeVee as he tried to understand what the hell makes something like “Fred” happen:
“Sometimes I just feel so…out of touch. Who is “Fred” and why is he so freaking huge on YouTube? Seriously. He has four of the site’s top 20 videos this month, attracting a total of more than 12.7 million plays. Of the 16 videos he’s posted, only three have not cracked the one million-play mark (and one of those three was just added today).”
In fact, this sort of phenomenom drives everybody in the business of trying to be successful with web video content. Why does some seemingly random kid come out of nowhere and command 7-figure viewcounts while thousands of “professionally” created videos languish in obscurity?
If you’re hoping for an answer from me, sorry. I truly believe that “viral” video is truly that – viral. You can’t make it happen. Why is this kid the flavor of the moment? Who the hell knows. It doesn’t really matter. It’s cool and hard to predict, like hurricanes or tornadoes. We know they’re going to happen. We just have know idea where or when.
TechDirt has some more news on the resurgence of vinyl LPs:
“Unlike the declining sales of CDs, Vinyl LP sales are expected to grow 60% this year over last year. However, the actual volume of vinyl sold (1 million albums sold versus 450 million for CDs) is very low, so clearly the resurgence is not an indication of a shift in consumer’s primary demand.”
While digital files are great for their flexibility it turns out that there is still something special about buying the record complete with cover art, liner notes and the physical disc itself with real grooves that produce the sound.
This is in important lesson for everyone in a business model that is being threatened by the digital revolution. Take a hard look at what you’re selling. It might be time to shift the focus.
I had to love the article the other day in the NYT about NBC’s partnership with insurance company Liberty Mutual to develop and produce back-door pilots in the form of sponsored TV movies.
“Branded entertainment efforts were a mainstay of TV in its early days — and of network radio before that. Series were developed jointly by advertisers and agencies and brought to the networks, which frequently named them after the sponsors.
Thus, NBC once offered programs like “Colgate Comedy Hour,” “Kraft Television Theater,” “Philco Television Playhouse” and “Dinah Shore Chevy Show.”
“We’re going backward, 100 percent,” Ben Silverman, co-chairman at the NBC Entertainment and Universal Media Studios divisions of NBC Universal, said, laughing.”
It’s nice to see the same language I used in our recent New Media pitch a couple of big corporations – except in my pitch you don’t really need NBC at all. Really, all they truly offer is distribution and that has become nearly free. True, they can drive a lot of eyeballs through marketing power, but so can magazines and blogs and the brands themselves.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=efec8c7a-4f32-4fc8-8252-99d12c6da89f)
Uncategorized | admin | 
July 21, 2009 12:40 pm | 
Comments (0) 
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=6b5ecc48-633b-46ed-9c8e-0bc9f3a11f44)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=9c011db3-d909-4b41-a120-c83ce688e5c3)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=26b5be55-110f-47b5-ad89-da219a016e2c)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=57fd14a6-1281-4b75-a462-427ce1514c65)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=90673b0d-a4f3-446a-853e-d95dd3798a27)
Subscribe